The effect of recall on forgetting.

Abstract

In experiments relating to the effect of recall on learning the procedure is essentially to vary the presentation of the learning material so that the amount of recitation is controlled. Under these conditions most investigators, e.g. Abbott (i) or Trow (7), have found that learning is more efficient with recitation than without it, and have offered two general types of explanation for this finding. According to the first, represented by Skaggs ( 5), recitation shows a subject where his learning is incomplete, and thus gives him greater opportunity than reading to check on his errors. It also offers him more incentive to perfect his learning, and may afford less retroactive inhibition. The second explanation, suggested by Gates (3), among others, depends on the fact that learning is tested by reproduction. Since recitation involves reproduction, the significant responses are practised in recitation more than in reading, and this exercise is considered to be the most important factor concerned in the effect of recall.It would be very difficult to find a crucial test of these theories when recitation is introduced into the learning period. In the present experiment the learning period was the same for all subjects; recalls were introduced during the seven days following it. Evidence will be presented which indicates that neither of the explanations suggested is adequate to account for all the effects of recall.

Effects of mobilization of prior knowledge on free recall.

“…Though there is no such test available as yet, the present study could be interpreted to indicate that because the facilitation of recall extended to nonmobilized list names of the category involved, the generation effect might not be limited to items initially recalled. It could be argued, in this respect, that the mobilization stage somehow primes the whole category, a notion reminiscent of Raffel's (1934) interpretation of what has sometimes been called the "Warner Brown effect" (W. Brown, 1923). In explaining the reminiscence that appeared to occur in the repeated recall of state names in Brown's experiment, Raffel suggested a facilitative effect of recall not limited to the items actually recalled at the time.…”

Disparate Effects of Repeated Testing: Reconciling Ballard's (1913) and Bartlett's (1932) Results

“…This positive effect of taking tests on later retention has been long known (Gates. 1917;Raffel, 1934;Spitzer. 1939).…”

Effects of Presentation- and Test-Trial Training on Motor Acquisition and Retention

“…Most of this evidence has come from research in verbal task learning. Here, the relative effects of p-and t-trial repetition during training have been of interest for a long time (Gates, 1917;Hellyer, 1962;Raffel, 1934) but have only recently received systematic investigation. In general, investigators have found that training methods which emphasize p-trial repetition produce superior acquisition (Hogan & Kintsch, 1971;Thompson, Wenger & Bartling, 1978, Exp III) whereas those which emphasize t-trial repetition produce superior retention (Allen, Mahler & Estes, 1969;Hogan & Kintsch, 1971;Rosner, 1970;Thompson, et al, 1978, Exp II;)…”